Delta Air Lines chief executive Ed Bastian is confident that the carrier will take delivery of the 75 Bombardier CS100s it has on order without paying a proposed 300% tariff on the aircraft. (www.flightglobal.com) さらに...

Both,Trump has Peruvian White dumped into the ventilation systems daily. Everyone is taking a bathroom break or a smoke with a friend. However, doing this happens more than 27 times a day is a little weird don't you think questions?

this boeing effort is confusing to me, for I have to wonder "where's the beef?". Bombardier is not their problem now or in the future, airbus is now and will be so in the future.Check what is in the coffee, for this makes no sense anyway I spin it.

Bombardier, if the C-series is successful, will very much be Boeing's problem. The CS100 does not compete with Boeing but if the 100 and 300 did well you can be sure airlines would be making Bombardier launch the CS500 and this aircraft would eat the 737's market share big time. Boeing wants to destroy the competition before it gets going. They learned a lesson with thinking Airbus couldn't compete.

True - this Boeing holier than thou BS is so transparent. Panic move on their part. Hope Delta resists being bullied. In the mean time, the C series is exceeding expectations in Europe. With Trump in power, perhaps further focus on Europe, followed by Asia is Bombardier's best approach.

First off, Boeing does not market a product that competes with the CS100 ordered by Delta. Without competition, there cannot be any complaint of "dumping" or market dominance.

Second, people continue to say that Canada subsidized Bombardier. Fact is, Quebec made a loan to Bombardier, that must be paid back. Fact is that Canada invested in the company, and those shares have value which must be paid on demand should the Government want to close that investment. On the other hand, Boeing received subsidies from the State of Washington and more which never have to be paid back, they were a gift.

There is no case here. There is no excuse for Boeing to bring this action against Bombardier.

There does seem to be a disconnect here. Boeing claims the C-Series could affect 737-7 sales and yet it never bid that aircraft for the Delta sale-so how could that have made a difference? I am surprised the Commerce Dept. finds merit in the claim...and I am a Boeing shareholder

If this claim prevails it will be ashortsighted win for Boeing. They will lose (at a minimum) F-18 sales to Canada along with increased animosity from European customers and industries that deal with Bombardier.

IMHO, this is but a testosterone play by Boeing. Reeks of Trumpism or at the very least Boeing taking advantage of the current "USA Fist" doctrine. My guess is that when Trump fades into the sunset, Boeing will suddenly be more receptive to reality. Hypocritical but the reality of big US business. On the other side of the coin, I hope / suspect that European providers will be rushing to address the recoil to this Boeing approach. Perhaps Boeing's commercial arm is disconnected from its military arm. Big gamble on Boeing's part! I can say that the Canadian gov't and general population clearly distrust Boeing / US. With the Cdn military making overtures to purchasing used F-18s from Australia, a clear message is being sent. Let's see where this plays out.

IMHO, this is but a testosterone play by Boeing. Reeks of Trumpism or at the very least Boeing taking advantage of the current "USA Fist" doctrine. My guess is that when Trump fades into the sunset, Boeing will suddenly be more receptive to reality. Hypocritical but the reality of big US business. On the other side of the coin, I hope / suspect that European providers will be rushing to address the recoil to this Boeing approach. Perhaps Boeing's commercial arm is disconnected from its military arm. Big gamble on Boeing's part! I can say that the Canadian gov't and general population clearly distrust Boeing / US. With the Cdn military making overtures to purchasing used F-18s from Australia, a clear message is being sent. Let's see where this plays out.

regardless of what mr trump and his "cronies" say,(and yes, this is a political issue because of mr trumps hypocritical ideas on "free trade"and making/purchasing in America),a company or corporation should be free to price and compare any purchase,particularly a large order of aircraft,and if they are offered a reasonable deal from elsewhere,make that purchase without being "fined" with an extremely large tariff..i might add mr trump already has had some drama of his own making,with boeing ,and they are an American company..

Well, the last news; Airbus partnership in the C-Series with Bombardier, that could be partly (and cynically) build in US(Alabama). It would flush the "tax"...

(... must be a "sweating afternoon" in Seattle...)As another good lesson of arrogant and pretentious attitude, Boing probably lost a few billion by loosing the sale of F18 Hornet fighters to the Canadians.

Tariff did work somewhat but Boeing shit in their own bed...now they have Airbus in their backyard with a superior product. Delta and JetBlue will load up on the C series and continue the Airbus line for larger jets.

In addition to Delta and JetBlue, American is also a likely customer. Before this announcement, I heard talk of either CS300 or 319neo's. Now that the 319 is dead, I'd expect to see another large US order. Alabama is going to get busy in a hurry.

The parts will ship to AL already painted. The amount of work required to be done in the US is miniscule for them to say "made in America". Just bolt on the wings and presto. I'd call this a victory for AL, a neutral event for BBD as they have lost control of their jet but gained long term viability/stability, a huge win for Airbus, and a huge loss for BA as the CSeries has gained stability and marketing power and will likely grow into MAX territory when Airbus is ready to replace the neo's.

Whether or not this benefits the US is unclear. If BA takes a big hit from international military spending and MAX orders then it could backfire on the US as well. Trade wars don't normally end well for any side.

... And, as M. Bastian said, Boing is no-match of the quality of Bombardier.(Fuel efficiency, Noise reduction, Avionics, etc..)Same reasons why Airbus got a part of the market in the US !And Boing do not produce anymore planes of this size. And Boing had the help($) of their government, what, nine times..!!?! and Bombardier couldn't ??!? It's pure & simple Yankees protectionist and pretentiousness attitude..! A real match of their Donald Duck in power..!

You see we up here in the Great White North have understood our place with the US when it comes to producing a quality product. Nice neighbours until pushed too far though. The C series needed a global partner to give it the international boost it needed. Thanks for helping with that Boeing! Hopefully, it will be seen as a win win win for all.

Boeing go screw yourselves. I cannot believe that this big monopoly player whom Canada has bought planes off of for decades. They have the gonads to do this to a Canadian company is beyond anything I have ever seen. I know if I were prime minister of Canada I would oppose 4oo% tariffs on all Boeing products. I would subsidize Air Canada and Westjet to scrap all their Boeing products and buy Bombardier and Airbus period. You want a war Boeing??and to think they want to go to Brazil and buy old used aircraft for Delta instead of new Bombardier aircraft. Thats a slap in the face to Delta. Hey Delta, move your airline to Canada, your American dollar will go further it will be cheaper to operate from here and then you can buy the Bombardier aircraft. I hope other airlines will see this and follow suit. Its time Boeing had its rear kicked so hard that it wont do this again.

I like Bombardier and their products, but if the Canadians are directly subsidizing production of the C-series, why wouldn't it make sense to offset that advantage by imposing a tariff? Not 300%, that's punitive, but proportional to the extent that the Canadians are chipping in per aircraft.

Follow the money, as in, the billions in tax breaks and subsidies Boeing receives both irectky and indirectly. Then follow the millions they spent to help Trump get elected and you'll find how this whole thing is both a sham and the ultimate in hypocrisy.

OK off the top of my head:1. Attacking net neutrality to benefit monopolized ISPs2. Use of Mar-a-lago and other conflicts of interest, failure to divest interests3. Proposed tax breaks benefiting primarily the top 10% of earners and worsening the defecit4. Proposed 300% tariff on C-Series5. Enlisting the help of Russia to spread uncertainty and divisiveness. 6. Nepotism within administration to further his family's wealth (Ivanka's business deal with China for instance)7. Eliminating public visitor logs at the White House (also no logs at Mar-a-Lago)8. Eliminating clean coal laws9. Wasting taxpayer time with investigations into crowd size at inauguration and voter fraud allegations.

I'm sure you're a good person, but the child in the White House is not.

You should probably turn off CNN and NBC. You seem to go for all the head fakes and Democrat talking points when all the action is under reported or ignored. He is cleaning up eight years of Obama's unconstitutional policies like giving billions to insurance companies after this was denied by Congress twice....nor will he be giving another $145 Billion to the Iranians without authorization.

Wow, I see you're just dismissing everything I said by calling it a "head fake". Thanks friend.

As to your points about Obama's "unconstitutional policies", I'll defer to my common sense which says most of his policies were done with good intentions. Whether or not they were unconstitutional I'll leave up to the courts. But the practice of executive orders has been getting stronger and stronger for decades. I don't necessarily agree with it, but forgiving Trump's actions simply because Obama used executive orders is just insincere.

Giving billions to insurance companies is the Republican congress' fault. Obama had to compromise to get something passed that moved us towards a better system. He succeeded in that, knowing full well it was not an optimal plan, in the hopes that future governments would IMPROVE upon it. Now that Trump is attacking it at every turn, it's just going to get worse, not better.

I don't know the details of the Iranian deal enough to comment. But I hope whatever is happening will either save us money or be approved by the appropriate channels. Good on Trump if that's the case.

"As to your points about Obama's "unconstitutional policies", I'll defer to my common sense which says most of his policies were done with good intentions. Whether or not they were unconstitutional I'll leave up to the courts. But the practice of executive orders has been getting stronger and stronger for decades. I don't necessarily agree with it, but forgiving Trump's actions simply because Obama used executive orders is just insincere."

And you still ignore my earlier points. Notice how I address your concerns but you ignore mine?

Your supposed common sense don't mean squat legally. The constitution does. All your claims mean zero or something would be happening. Nothing is. Virtually everything president O did by exec order is getting undone. Enough politics. Back to the airplanes. I could give a crap what planes Delta buys as long as there is something in it for the US. I won't be riding in them. I don't care if Boeing (I'll use the whole name for you) made a screw up. Pretty sure they'll be just fine. Time to move on.